[ 292 ] [MARCH, 



SIR HENRY PARNELL ON " FINANCIAL REFORM,' 1 &C. 



IT has been very well observed that the abstract reasonings and 

 theoretical doctrines of speculators in political economy, are seldom in 

 unison with the experience of practical men who conduct the real 

 business of life. Hence it often happens, that the latter finding many 

 of the reasonings of the theorists incompatible with every day practice, 

 entertain an undue contempt for their opinions ; and finding them 

 decidedly wrong on certain points, conclude that they are wrong in all. 

 They make no allowance for the immense field of inquiry embraced by 

 the economists, or for the impossibility of one man being able to com- 

 prehend, and give a clear view of every particular question. The 

 theorists, on the other hand, are, in the absence of practical knowledge 

 and experience, apt to reason upon things as they, in pursuance of their 

 own arguments, would wish to have them, not as they actually are ; 

 and by substituting matters of opinion for matters of fact, they deceive 

 themselves, and mislead those who place confidence in their judgment 

 and research. 



Sir Henry Parnell's book on Financial Reform, of which, within 

 these few days, a third edition, " with additions," has appeared, affords a 

 strong proof that one man may reason very accurately on certain points, 

 to which he has specially directed his attention, whilst on others, not 

 so much within the sphere of his observation, his opinions and state- 

 ments may be at variance with well known facts, and even contrary to 

 common sense. 



We would place under the first division almost every thing Sir Henry 

 has said relative to taxation and retrenchment ; while we think that a 

 slight examination of many of the assertions and dogmas put forth in the 

 chapter, specially appropriated to Colonial affairs, will justify us in con- 

 sidering them erroneous and inadmissible, in so far at least as they 

 may be supposed applicable to our West India possessions. 



It is justly observed " that no parliamentary documents shew what 

 the whole expence is that is paid, by English taxes, on account of the 

 Colonies; and that it is generally estimated that from two to three 

 millions are paid for the army, navy, and various civil charges." But 

 so ignorant does Sir Henry appear to be on this subject, that he actually 

 quotes an erroneous statement made on the subject of West India 

 expenditure, from that mendacious publication, the Anti- Slavery Re- 

 porter ! He, further, refers to a treasury letter of the 24th of March, 

 1827;, in which it is stated that the collective expenditure of five of 

 our colonies has exceeded, on an account of ten and more years, the 

 colonial revenues applicable to the discharge of it, so as to have con- 

 stituted a deficiency of ^524,000 ; but Sir Henry might have seen 

 by a subsequent official document that this deficiency does not relate to 

 our West India colonies, but is referable to Ceylon, Mauritius, the 

 Cape of Good Hope, Malta, c. ; and it certainly appears to be no proof 

 of candour on the part of Sir Henry, to quote from a degraded source, 

 leaving authentic documents on the other side of the question, unnoticed. 



We believe that the expenses actually paid by Great Britain in governing 

 her West India Colonies, has been variously estimated at from 700,000 

 to 1,100,000 or 1,200,000. The whole charge on account of the lee- 

 ward and windward islands in 1828 was stated at nearly 500,000, and 

 allowing 350,000 for the naval and military expenditure of Jamaica, 



